Global Oil Surges, War Risk, and Everyday Insecurity: A Critical Sociology of Energy Shock, Unequal Vulnerability, and Economic Power in a Time of Escalating Middle East Conflict

Authors: Huda Najjar¹ (orcid ID:0009-0007-0765-6001)

¹ Swiss International University (SIU)

Abstract

The sharp rise in oil prices during March and early April 2026 has placed energy back at the center of global economic debate. The immediate trigger has been the escalation of war in the Middle East, especially the disruption of flows through the Strait of Hormuz and the damage to energy infrastructure across the region. Yet the meaning of this shock cannot be understood only through commodity charts or short-term market commentary. Oil is not just a fuel. It is a social relation, a source of geopolitical power, a carrier of unequal risk, and a hidden foundation of daily life. When oil prices jump, the effects move far beyond the energy sector. They shape inflation, transport costs, food prices, tourism demand, household anxiety, state policy, corporate strategy, and global inequality. Recent reporting indicates that Brent crude moved above $119 per barrel at the height of the latest stress, while on 2 April 2026 it again jumped more than 7% after renewed signals that attacks on Iran would continue. The International Energy Agency has warned that nearly 20 million barrels per day of crude and product exports have been disrupted by the crisis, and the IMF has warned that all roads in this scenario lead toward higher prices and slower growth.

This article offers a journal-style critical analysis of the present oil shock using insights from political economy and sociology. It combines macroeconomic analysis with social theory, including Bourdieu’s concept of capital, world-systems theory, institutional isomorphism, and risk society. The main argument is that the present oil shock is not simply a market event. It is a structured social crisis that reveals how deeply the world economy remains dependent on fragile energy corridors and how unequally the burdens of volatility are distributed. Core economies can absorb shocks more easily through reserves, diversified finance, and institutional power, while peripheral and energy-importing societies face sharper pressures on inflation, debt, food security, and public stability. The article also shows that households experience oil shocks not as abstract geopolitical events but as higher fares, more expensive food, reduced mobility, and greater insecurity. In this sense, oil is both a strategic commodity and a social fact.

By examining market data, institutional responses, and the broader social meaning of energy dependence, the article argues that the current crisis should be understood as a warning. It shows that globalization remains materially tied to oil, that world order is still shaped by military geography, and that the language of resilience often hides deep asymmetries of power. The article concludes that a serious response must go beyond emergency price management. It requires institutional reform, diversification of energy systems, protection of vulnerable households, and a more realistic understanding of how conflict in one region can reorganize everyday life across the planet.

1. Introduction: Why This Oil Shock Matters

During the last month, one of the strongest global economic trends has been the renewed surge in oil prices caused by escalating conflict in the Middle East. The issue is not important only because oil is more expensive. It matters because oil still functions as a central nervous system of the world economy. It moves factories, shipping networks, aviation, agriculture, tourism, urban commuting, and military systems. Even in countries that speak confidently about energy transition, daily economic life remains heavily dependent on fossil fuel infrastructure. When a major geopolitical conflict threatens one of the most important energy corridors in the world, the result is not merely a technical market adjustment. It becomes a broad social event.

Recent developments show why the concern is serious. Reuters reported that Brent crude rose more than 7% on 2 April 2026 to about $108.81 per barrel and U.S. crude to about $107.18 after statements that attacks on Iran would continue, while prices had earlier climbed above $119 during the conflict. At the same time, the IEA stated in its March 2026 Oil Market Report that the war had led to a near halt in tanker movements through the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting almost 20 million barrels per day of crude and product exports. The IMF then warned that the conflict could push inflation higher and slow growth globally, including through what it described as an asymmetric shock hitting low-income countries especially hard.

This matters for three reasons. First, oil is still systemic. It is embedded in nearly every supply chain. Second, oil shocks spread socially in unequal ways. Third, conflict-driven price spikes are not temporary in their consequences, even when prices later fall. Firms change expectations, airlines adjust fares, governments revise budgets, investors reprice risk, and households cut consumption. The event becomes economic memory.

This article therefore asks a larger question: what does the latest oil surge reveal about the structure of the world economy and the way risk is socially distributed? To answer that question, the article moves beyond narrow market analysis and places the oil shock within a broader sociological framework.

2. The Immediate Trigger: Conflict, Chokepoints, and Price Transmission

The present oil shock is rooted in war. Reuters reported that the current conflict began on 28 February 2026 with joint U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, and that the fighting spread across the region with serious consequences for energy flows, food supply chains, and tourism. The strategic center of concern has been the Strait of Hormuz, one of the most important oil transit chokepoints in the world. The IEA’s March report described tanker movement through the strait as near halted and warned that limited alternatives existed to replace this route at scale.

This is a classic example of how a local conflict becomes a global economic shock. Oil prices do not respond only to what has already happened. They also respond to fear, probability, insurance costs, freight rates, and uncertainty about future flows. Reuters reported in early March that global oil and gas shipping costs surged to record highs as conflict intensified and Tehran threatened the strait, with very large crude carrier freight rates reaching extreme levels.

Once that happens, the transmission chain moves quickly. Higher crude prices feed into refinery margins, jet fuel, diesel, gasoline, shipping contracts, and consumer prices. The effect is amplified when traders, shipowners, insurers, and logistics firms price in uncertainty rather than waiting for actual shortages. That is why even the expectation of prolonged conflict can alter the cost structure of the global economy.

Reuters also reported that U.S. clean petroleum product exports hit a record 3.11 million barrels per day in March 2026 as Europe, Asia, and Africa sought to replace disrupted Middle East supply. Exports to Europe rose 27%, exports to Asia more than doubled, and exports to Africa surged 169%. This demonstrates that markets do adapt, but adaptation comes at a price. Replacement supply may exist, yet it often travels farther, costs more, and reaches consumers later.

3. Oil as a Social Relation, Not Just a Commodity

A narrow economic reading sees oil as a commodity whose price rises or falls according to supply and demand. That is true, but incomplete. Oil should also be understood as a social relation. It connects distant regions through infrastructures of extraction, transport, finance, military protection, and state power. The price of oil reflects not only geology and production but also the distribution of global authority.

From a sociological point of view, oil is powerful because it is hidden inside normal life. It is present in food transport, fertilizer production, aviation, public transport, logistics, plastics, tourism, and heating. Most households do not buy crude oil, but they live inside oil-based systems. When prices rise, they experience the shock indirectly through many small changes that accumulate: a more expensive school run, higher grocery bills, more costly flights, rising delivery fees, and renewed pressure on wages.

This is why oil shocks feel larger than many other price changes. They challenge routine. They interfere with what Pierre Bourdieu would call practical sense: the ordinary taken-for-granted organization of life. The daily assumptions through which people plan work, travel, family budgets, and social mobility are disrupted. The household does not necessarily interpret this as “geopolitical risk.” It feels it as instability.

4. A Theoretical Lens: Bourdieu and the Unequal Capacity to Absorb Shock

Bourdieu’s concept of capital helps explain why oil shocks do not affect everyone equally. Economic capital determines whether households and firms can absorb higher transport and energy costs. Social capital matters because networks can provide alternatives, information, and support. Cultural capital shapes who can interpret the crisis, plan ahead, and shift behavior efficiently. Symbolic capital matters because some actors, especially major states and large corporations, can frame the crisis, claim expertise, and define what counts as a reasonable response.

Under an oil shock, wealthy households may treat higher fuel costs as an inconvenience. Poorer households treat them as a threat. The same difference appears among firms. Large corporations can hedge, renegotiate routes, pass costs to consumers, or use market power to protect margins. Small firms often cannot. In this sense, price volatility is filtered through social structure.

This logic also applies internationally. Strong states possess larger strategic reserves, better fiscal tools, stronger currencies, more institutional legitimacy, and deeper financial markets. Weaker states face imported inflation, currency pressure, subsidy stress, and social unrest. Reuters reported, for example, that Morocco’s fuel prices had risen about 30% and that the government restored fuel subsidies for professional transport sectors, while its 2026 budget had assumed a much lower oil price than current levels. That is a clear example of how external energy volatility can quickly become a domestic governance challenge.

Bourdieu helps us see that resilience is not a moral virtue. It is a distribution of resources. Some actors can be resilient because they already hold more capital.

5. World-Systems Theory: Core, Periphery, and the Geography of Vulnerability

World-systems theory provides another useful lens. The world economy is not flat. It is organized through unequal exchange between core, semi-peripheral, and peripheral zones. In such a system, energy shocks do not simply travel evenly across space. They reinforce hierarchy.

Core economies often have stronger currencies, more stable access to credit, strategic reserves, and greater bargaining power in trade and diplomacy. Peripheral and lower-income economies are more exposed to import bills, debt risk, food inflation, and transport shocks. The IMF made this point clearly in recent public comments, warning that low-income countries may need external support because the conflict is pushing energy and commodity prices higher while slowing growth. Reuters summarized the IMF position as follows: “all roads lead to higher prices and slower growth.”

The irony is important. Many energy-importing countries in the periphery are deeply integrated into the global system, yet they have limited power to shape the conditions under which they are integrated. They suffer from decisions taken elsewhere: military escalation, shipping disruption, speculative movement, reserve management, and monetary tightening in advanced economies. Their exposure is global, but their control is weak.

This is why the current oil shock is not only a story about energy. It is a story about unequal sovereignty under globalization. The ability to secure fuel, protect consumers, and stabilize the macroeconomy is part of what defines effective statehood in the contemporary world.

6. Institutional Isomorphism and the Politics of “Resilience”

Institutional isomorphism, associated with DiMaggio and Powell, helps explain another important feature of the crisis. When uncertainty rises, organizations tend to imitate one another. Governments, firms, universities, think tanks, and international agencies begin using the same language: resilience, flexibility, risk management, diversification, sustainability, contingency planning.

This language has value, but it also has limits. It can create the appearance of competence without changing structural dependence. The world says it is diversifying, yet one chokepoint still threatens a major share of global oil flows. Firms say they are agile, yet they remain vulnerable to freight spikes, route closures, and fuel costs. States speak about energy transition, yet public budgets still assume relatively moderate oil prices and are destabilized when prices jump sharply.

The IEA’s March 2026 materials illustrate both the necessity and the limit of current policy thinking. On the one hand, the agency responded quickly, launching a tracker for policy responses and publishing a report on how households, businesses, and governments can shelter themselves from the oil shock. It outlined ten demand-side measures that can be implemented within weeks. On the other hand, the very need for emergency demand-side actions is evidence that structural dependence remains high.

Institutional isomorphism is therefore visible in the global policy field. Everyone begins to sound similar under stress. But similarity of language is not the same as equality of capacity.

7. Inflation, Interest Rates, and the Return of Cost-Push Pressure

One of the clearest economic effects of the current oil shock is renewed inflation pressure. The IMF’s Kristalina Georgieva warned in March that a persistent 10% increase in oil prices through most of the year could add about 40 basis points to global inflation. This is significant because many countries have only recently emerged from earlier inflationary waves and remain politically sensitive to renewed price growth.

Oil shocks create cost-push inflation. Businesses pay more for transport, freight, fuel, packaging, heating, and production. Some absorb costs temporarily, but many pass them forward. Airlines are a direct example. Reuters reported that jet fuel, which had been around $85 to $90 per barrel before the strikes on Iran, rose to roughly $150 to $200, forcing airlines to review forecasts, raise fares, and rethink capacity. Reuters also reported that global airlines had begun hiking fares and cutting capacity as the surge in oil prices threatened profitability and travel demand.

The tourism sector is particularly sensitive because it depends on mobility, consumer confidence, and discretionary spending. Reuters also reported that more than 19,000 flights had been canceled across seven major Middle East airports since 28 February, while route closures and fuel costs were disrupting normal traffic.

Inflation from oil is politically difficult because it feels unfair. Workers did not cause the conflict. Consumers did not close the strait. Yet they face the bill. If central banks respond with tighter policy, the burden can grow further through weaker demand, more expensive borrowing, and slower growth. Thus oil shocks can generate a policy trap: tolerate inflation and credibility weakens; tighten too hard and recession risk rises.

8. Tourism, Mobility, and the Social Meaning of Travel

From a management and tourism perspective, the current oil surge has deeper implications than higher ticket prices. Travel is a social practice tied to aspiration, status, connection, education, migration, and business life. When oil rises sharply, mobility becomes more selective. People with greater resources keep moving. Others reduce travel, delay trips, or abandon them entirely.

This matters for universities, international conferences, destination economies, and aviation-dependent regions. Tourism is not only leisure; it is a major labor market and an infrastructure of international exchange. If fares rise and uncertainty grows, destinations dependent on aviation can suffer even if they are far from the conflict itself. Reuters reported that airlines and travel operators began scrambling early in March as higher oil prices and route disruption raised concerns about the wider hit to travel demand.

In sociological terms, mobility is stratified. Cheap oil enabled forms of normalized global movement that many people came to see as ordinary. A major oil shock reminds the world that mobility is not natural; it is subsidized by political order, infrastructure, and energy abundance. Once those conditions weaken, social hierarchy reappears more clearly.

9. Financial Markets, Speculation, and the Price of Uncertainty

Oil prices rise not only because of physical shortage but also because markets trade uncertainty. The recent conflict has shown this clearly. Prices have moved sharply up and down with each change in military or diplomatic signals. Reuters reported on 1 April that oil slid after comments suggesting the war might end soon, even after a month of record gains. The next day, prices rose sharply again when attacks were expected to continue.

This volatility matters because planning becomes harder. Firms cannot easily price contracts. Airlines cannot confidently set schedules. Governments cannot know how large fuel subsidy costs may become. Investors demand higher risk premiums. Insurance costs rise. In short, uncertainty becomes expensive.

From a sociological perspective, this resembles Ulrich Beck’s idea of risk society. Modern systems produce risks that are delocalized and hard to contain. A military decision in one region changes freight, inflation, politics, and household expectations elsewhere. Risk becomes global, but protection remains unequal.

10. Everyday Life: What It Means for Ordinary People

The title asks what the crisis means for the world economy and for you. That second part is important. Many articles stop at GDP, inflation, and Brent benchmarks. But ordinary people experience oil shocks through everyday life.

It means commuting may cost more. Delivery fees may rise. Food may become more expensive as transport and fertilizer costs increase. Air travel may feel less affordable. Businesses may become cautious about hiring. Governments may reduce spending elsewhere to finance subsidies or absorb higher import bills. If inflation returns, wage growth may fall behind prices again.

Reuters reported that in the United States gasoline prices moved above $4 per gallon and diesel approached $5.50 as exports rose and supply disruption elsewhere intensified demand. In Morocco, fuel prices rose around 30%, prompting subsidy action. These are examples from very different economies, but both show the same reality: oil shocks quickly enter the household budget.

The sociological point is that households do not live in “the energy market.” They live in systems shaped by energy. When that hidden system becomes unstable, insecurity spreads into daily decision-making.

11. Geopolitical Power and Symbolic Narratives

Oil shocks are also battles over narrative. Governments attempt to reassure markets. Producers frame themselves as stabilizers. Financial analysts debate whether prices are overreacting or underreacting. Media focus on dramatic benchmarks such as $100, $120, or $150 per barrel because round numbers carry symbolic force.

Reuters reported on 31 March that analysts had sharply revised oil price forecasts upward, even while average 2026 expectations remained below current spot panic levels. That distinction is important. It means markets may believe the worst stress is temporary, yet still accept that the baseline has shifted higher.

This symbolic dimension matters because expectations shape behavior. If firms believe the world has entered a more dangerous energy era, they change investment, hedging, travel, and sourcing decisions before the full physical effects are visible.

12. Can the World Absorb This Shock?

The answer is yes and no.

Yes, because the world economy has more tools than in previous oil crises. It has strategic reserves, more diversified suppliers, better data, larger spot markets, flexible trade flows, and stronger institutional coordination. Reuters reported that the IEA, IMF, and World Bank have already formed a coordination group to respond to the energy and economic fallout. The IEA has also published practical demand-side measures to reduce oil use and costs rapidly.

But also no, because the world remains highly exposed. The IEA’s March report makes plain how serious the disruption is, and recent shipping and aviation reporting shows that rerouting and replacement are costly. Even where supply can be found, affordability becomes the issue. Energy security in a formal sense does not automatically mean social security.

In addition, oil shocks rarely stay in one sector. They migrate. They become inflation, public anger, weaker travel demand, tighter policy, and slower investment. That is why the IMF’s warning about higher prices and slower growth should be taken seriously.

13. Policy Implications: Beyond Emergency Management

A serious response to the current oil shock should operate at four levels.

First, short-term consumer protection is necessary. Targeted support for transport, lower-income households, and critical services can prevent social pain from becoming social instability. Second, demand-side adaptation matters. The IEA is correct that governments, businesses, and households can reduce exposure through practical measures implemented within weeks. Third, diversification must become more real and less rhetorical. Energy transition cannot remain a branding exercise while economies still depend on highly vulnerable corridors. Fourth, macroeconomic coordination is essential. Energy-importing and lower-income countries may require liquidity, trade finance, and policy support, not only advice.

For universities, tourism firms, and international organizations, the lesson is equally clear: energy risk is no longer a remote issue for engineers alone. It is now a strategic management issue, a budgeting issue, a mobility issue, and a reputational issue.

14. Conclusion

The surge in oil prices over the last month, driven by escalating Middle East conflict, is one of the most important global economic developments of the moment. Yet its meaning goes beyond energy economics. It reveals how the world economy remains materially dependent on fragile infrastructures of extraction and transport. It shows how conflict travels through prices into daily life. It exposes the unequal distribution of resilience across classes, firms, and states. And it reminds us that globalization is still built on physical chokepoints, not only digital networks.

A critical sociology of this moment shows that oil is never only oil. It is power, mobility, hierarchy, and risk in liquid form. The present crisis should therefore be read as more than a temporary commodity spike. It is a structural warning. If the world continues to speak the language of resilience without reducing underlying dependence, similar shocks will keep returning. And each time they do, the costs will again fall most heavily on those with the least power to shape the system.

For the world economy, the message is clear: higher energy insecurity means higher inflation risk, weaker growth, and renewed fragility in trade and tourism. For ordinary people, the message is even simpler: war far away can still enter the kitchen, the airport, the office, the fuel station, and the family budget. That is the real sociology of oil in 2026.

Hashtags

#GlobalOilPrices #MiddleEastConflict #WorldEconomy #EnergySecurity #InflationRisk #TourismEconomy #GeopoliticalRisk

References

• Adams, Z. and Glück, T., 2023. Financialization and commodity markets: Oil price volatility revisited. Review of International Political Economy, 30(2), pp.345–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2021.1950093

• Alhajji, A.F., 2021. Oil price shocks and global economic cycles. Houston: Energy Outlook Advisors.

• Arezki, R. and Blanchard, O., 2023. Seven questions about the recent oil price shock. IMF Economic Review, 71(1), pp.1–25. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41308-022-00185-6

• Baffes, J., Kose, M.A. and Ohnsorge, F., 2022. Commodity markets outlook: The impact of war on energy prices. Washington, DC: World Bank.

• Beck, U., 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.

• BIS (Bank for International Settlements), 2023. Oil price shocks and inflation dynamics. Basel: BIS.

• Bourdieu, P., 1986. The forms of capital. In: Richardson, J. (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood, pp.241–258.

• Bridge, G. and Le Billon, P., 2017. Oil. Cambridge: Polity Press.

• Bruckner, M. and Ciccone, A., 2019. Oil price shocks, income, and democracy. Review of Economics and Statistics, 101(2), pp.275–290. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00772

• Colgan, J.D., 2022. Oil, domestic politics, and international conflict. Energy Research & Social Science, 89, 102528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102528

• DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W., 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism. American Sociological Review, 48(2), pp.147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

• EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration), 2026. Short-term energy outlook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.

• Fattouh, B., Kilian, L. and Mahadeva, L., 2013. The role of speculation in oil markets. The Energy Journal, 34(3), pp.7–32.

• Friedrichs, J., 2020. The Future Is Not What It Used to Be: Climate Change and Energy Scarcity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

• Georgieva, K., 2026. Global economic outlook under energy shocks. Washington, DC: IMF.

• González, A. and Trujillo-Baute, E., 2021. Energy prices and inflation: Evidence from global markets. Energy Economics, 99, 105283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105283

• Hamilton, J.D., 2009. Causes and consequences of the oil shock of 2007–08. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 40(1), pp.215–283. https://doi.org/10.1353/eca.0.0047

• Hamilton, J.D., 2011. Historical oil shocks. In: Parker, R. and Whaples, R. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Major Events in Economic History. London: Routledge.

• IEA (International Energy Agency), 2026. Oil Market Report, March 2026. Paris: IEA.

• IEA, 2026. Sheltering from Oil Shocks. Paris: IEA.

• IMF, 2024. World Economic Outlook: Navigating Global Divergences. Washington, DC: IMF.

• IMF, 2026. Middle East conflict and global inflation risks. Washington, DC: IMF.

• Ingham, G., 2008. Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

• International Transport Forum, 2023. Transport and fuel price volatility. Paris: OECD.

• Kilian, L., 2008. Exogenous oil supply shocks: How big are they? Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(2), pp.216–240. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.90.2.216

• Kilian, L. and Murphy, D., 2014. The role of inventories and speculative trading. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 29(3), pp.454–478. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.2322

• Krugman, P., 2022. Oil shocks and stagflation revisited. New York Times Economic Review.

• Le Billon, P., 2012. Wars of Plunder: Conflicts, Profits and the Politics of Resources. London: Hurst.

• Mabro, R., 2018. Oil in the 21st century: Geopolitical and economic dynamics. Oxford: Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.

• Mankiw, N.G., 2021. Principles of Economics. 9th ed. Boston: Cengage.

• OECD, 2025. Energy price shocks and macroeconomic stability. Paris: OECD Publishing.

• Ohnsorge, F. and Yu, S., 2022. The long shadow of oil shocks. World Bank Research Observer, 37(1), pp.1–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkab011

• OPEC, 2026. Monthly oil market report. Vienna: OPEC.

• Piketty, T., 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

• Reinhart, C.M. and Rogoff, K.S., 2009. This Time is Different. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

• Reuters, 2026. Oil prices jump over 7% after escalation in Middle East conflict. London: Reuters.

• Reuters, 2026. IMF warns of inflation risks due to Middle East war. London: Reuters.

• Reuters, 2026. Global airlines raise fares amid rising fuel costs. London: Reuters.

• Reuters, 2026. Oil shipping costs surge to record highs. London: Reuters.

• Reuters, 2026. Fuel exports hit record as supply shifts globally. London: Reuters.

• Sachs, J.D. and Warner, A.M., 2001. Natural resources and economic development. European Economic Review, 45(4–6), pp.827–838.

• Said, E., 1978. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books.

• Shell International, 2025. Global energy scenarios. London: Shell.

• Smith, B., 2023. Oil dependency and global inequality. Energy Policy, 170, 113213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113213

• Stiglitz, J.E., 2012. The Price of Inequality. New York: W.W. Norton.

• Taleb, N.N., 2007. The Black Swan. New York: Random House.

• UNCTAD, 2023. Trade and development report. Geneva: United Nations.

• UNWTO, 2024. Tourism and transport cost trends. Madrid: UNWTO.

• Van der Ploeg, F., 2011. Natural resources and the economy. Journal of Economic Literature, 49(2), pp.366–420. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.49.2.366

• Weber, M., 1978. Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.

• WEF, 2026. Global risks report. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

• World Bank, 2025. Commodity markets outlook. Washington, DC: World Bank.

• World Bank, 2026. Global economic prospects under energy shocks. Washington, DC: World Bank.

• Yergin, D., 2020. The New Map: Energy, Climate, and the Clash of Nations. New York: Penguin.

• Zhang, D., Hu, M. and Ji, Q., 2020. Financial markets under COVID-19 and oil shock. Finance Research Letters, 36, 101528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101528